Pat can place the weekly supplier order in forty minutes. Someone else may need half a day to work out which quantities are correct, why two similar parts are not interchangeable and whether a late delivery requires a change.
In this illustrative example, Pat works at a small distributor and places that order every Tuesday. The problem is not that Pat has failed to write enough instructions. Pat has learned to recognize situations that other people have never handled.
A procedure can preserve steps. A capable backup must also recognize a mistake, choose among allowed options and know when to stop. You find out whether that capability exists by letting someone else do the work.
Pick one job that would hurt to lose
Start with a recurring job where one person’s absence would cause a real delay. Look beyond seniority. The dependency might sit with the person who knows the customer portal, handles a specialist machine or understands a supplier’s ordering rules.
Pat’s Tuesday order is that kind of job. A colleague is listed as the backup but has never completed it without Pat beside them. Naming a backup does not show they can place the order.
Define the job narrowly enough to practice. “Know purchasing” is too broad. “Prepare, place and confirm the regular Tuesday order within the approved purchasing rules” is a workable unit.
Then choose the backup for access, skills and available time. Someone who is already fully busy may understand the job and still be unable to cover it.
Watch the decisions, not just the clicks
Have the backup join Pat for a normal run. Ask Pat to explain the moments when the answer is not obvious.
Why did Pat check that delivery? What made that quantity look wrong? Which substitutions are acceptable, and what would cause the order to pause?
These questions expose judgment that a recording of mouse clicks can miss. The backup does not need Pat’s whole history with the supplier, only the facts that change today’s order.
Add those decision points to the team’s existing instructions rather than starting another document. Useful instructions support the task while it is happening, as described in keeping processes useful after they are written.
For the distributor, the learning plan could look like this:
| Part of the job | What Pat explains | The backup’s test |
|---|---|---|
| Calculate the order | How stock, demand and incoming deliveries affect quantities | Work out the quantities and explain any unusual change |
| Choose an item | Which similar parts can replace each other, and which cannot | Pick a part that can stand in, or stop and ask |
| Meet the cutoff | When the supplier must receive the order | Send it early enough for a review before the cutoff |
| Check the result | What the supplier’s confirmation should show | Check that the supplier confirmed the items and quantities you ordered |
| Handle an exception | Who can approve a higher price, a new supplier or a much larger order | Spot the change and take it to that person |
The backup does not have to solve every exception alone.
Swap who does the work
On the next run, the backup leads and Pat observes. Let the backup use the normal instructions and tools. The point is reliable execution, not a memory test.
Pat should not step in at the first hesitation, since a pause can reveal an unclear instruction or a missing source. If Pat supplies every answer at once, both people can leave believing the job has transferred while the hard parts stayed with Pat.
Step in only to prevent a serious mistake. Note where and why, and fix that gap before the independent test.
For example, the backup may choose the correct items but miss a delivery already in transit. The solution could be a better stock view and an explicit check before calculating quantities. “Be more careful” does not give the next attempt anything new to work with.
Run a real independent test
For the next suitable order, Pat is unavailable for routine questions. The backup does the job with the access, instructions and approvals they would have during real coverage.
Keep any review the work normally requires, since independence does not mean removing a control. If purchases need approval, the backup prepares a complete order and gets that approval. Test the whole route through confirmation, not just the order form.
Afterward, judge the result against what you agreed before starting: was the order correct and accepted in time? Did exceptions reach the right person? How much help was needed, and from whom?
A test can reveal partial coverage: the colleague may handle a normal order but need help when the supplier cannot fill it. Write that limit down and plan another practice run. Do not call someone a fully trained backup before they can do the work.
Keep the ability alive
Give the backup a real order from time to time, and repeat the practice after any significant change to the supplier, tools or process.
Pat needs time to teach, and the backup needs time to practice. Make clear to both that this is about dependable coverage, not a judgment of Pat.
Choose one job this week. Name the person who could cover it, the result they need to produce and the date they will try it independently. Until that attempt happens, “we have a backup” is still an assumption.
